ASIA-PACIFIC JOURNAL OF RESEARCH Copyright 2014 by THE PACIFIC

IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

Vol.8, No.2, May 2014, pp.153-173 ISSN 1976-1961

Introducing Filipino Games To

Promote Peer Play Interaction

Thelma Rabago-Mingoa1) Therese Angeline M. Estacio Joanna Erika M. Perlas

De La Salle University - Manila

Abstract
Long ago, Filipino games have been part of the Filipino pastime. These games, being cooperative by
nature, seem to promote close social relationships in the family, in school and in the community. But
nowadays, Filipino children rarely play these games. The present generation has been exposed to a
variety of games in handheld technological devices that could lead to less interest in playing Filipino
games, or other social play. This action research aimed to find out how teaching Filipino games to
kindergarten students, help promote peer play interaction in a class of eleven children, aged 3 to 4 years
old, in a private preschool in Metro Manila. They were observed to do solitary and parallel play very
often, and hardly do associative or cooperative play. This research is qualitative and data analysis is
limited to descriptive statistics to show difference of peer interaction between pre- and post-intervention.
The researchers used observation, video recording, anecdotal records, and a Peer Play Checklist in data
gathering. Results show that Filipino Games are effective in promoting peer interaction among children.
More of the children were able to cooperate and collaborate with their peers, listened better, encouraged
peers to join in, were more considerate, and responded to ideas more often. This implies that preschool
teachers can teach 3 to 4 year old children Filipino games to promote peer interaction or socialization.

Keywords: peer interaction, socialization, Filipino games, cooperative play

Corresponding author, 1)[email protected]

153
 Thelma R. Mingoa, Therese M. Estacio, and Joanna M. Perlas

Introduction

To be successful in human society, children need to understand and acquire social

competencies. In early childhood, this is the “ability of young children to successfully and
appropriately select and carry out their interpersonal goals” (Guralnick, 1990). Thus social
competence is the effectiveness and appropriateness of interaction and relationships with
other people in particular settings. They can be defined either by skills (like problem-solving
behavior, taking the perspective of others, taking turns) or by outcomes (like having friends,
being popular/liked by peers, or engaging in effective social peer interaction). Thus if one
outcome of being socially competent is having friends, then in a child’s context, it would
mean he has playmates. Since a child normally lives and learns through play, in order to have
playmates, he should learn how to play successfully with others.
An essential skill learned in early childhood is the ability to develop positive social
competence and establish effective peer relationships, especially through play, influencing
academic and social success (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, cited in Isenberg and Jalongo,
2010). Professional organizations for early childhood, like the National Association for the
Education of Young Children (NAEYC) and the International Association for Childhood
Education (IACE), emphasize the importance of play as part of kindergarten curriculum
because, while playing, children develop cognitive, social, emotional and language skills as
well (Nadon-Gabrion, 2007; Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, cited in Isenberg and Jalongo,
2003). Play therefore, as a developmentally appropriate practice, is a necessity (Jamison,
2010).
Long ago, Filipino children had the opportunity to play social games in the neighborhood
during their pastime. While playing, there was fun in negotiations and compromises going on,
from playing pretend games during free play to traditional Filipino games with simple rules.
Most of these games, being cooperative by nature, seem to promote close social relationships
in the family, in school and in the community.
Nowadays, many Filipino children rarely play these games. The present generation has
been exposed to a variety of electronic games in handheld technological devices like tablets,
cellphones and game consoles, that could lead to less interest in playing Filipino games, or
other cooperative games.

154
 Introducing Filipino Games To Promote Peer Play Interaction

Objectives of the study

The children in this study were enrolled in a play-based private school, which believes that
through play, children’s curiosity and eagerness to learn arises. However, the children in a
class of 3- to 4-year olds were observed to do solitary and parallel play most of the time, and
the school wanted to encourage them to play with each other. During free time, students in
this school were given time to play and were offered a variety of toys, play equipment and
learning materials to choose from. With a wide range of toys and equipment to choose from,
the children often played by themselves. This behavior continued even up to the middle of the
school year, despite being together daily for at least five months when this research was done.
Thus, this study introduced Filipino games to the children to see its effect in promoting peer
interaction in this age group. Specifically, it aimed to answer the following questions: (1)
How does introducing Filipino games to 3- to 4-year old children promote peer interaction?
and (2) What common behaviors do children show while playing Filipino games?

Literature Review. The development of social competence for a successful adjustment to

kindergarten is deemed necessary for social and academic success. A component of social
competence is effective peer interaction during play (Hampton, 1999).
As children play they experience peer interaction, cognitive challenges, use of language,
and expressing emotions, learning essential behavioral skills needed to survive in the world.
They continuously put into practice these skills, which they apply, exercise, and repeatedly
carry out for them to be able to endure the challenges that they would be facing as they
become adults (Gorin & Steffens, 1997; Mitchell &Wild, 2007; Reynolds & Jones, 1997).
Play is important since it helps build confidence, ability to interact socially and, gain
empathy for others. Interaction in active play allows children to engage in higher level or
elaborated play schemes and movement with peers and are more likely to use verbal
communication compared to children who engage in inactive play or those who have not
much contact with peers during play time (Gorin & Steffens, 1997). This is in line with the
sociocultural theory of Vygotsky, stressing that for cognitive development to occur, the child
should be socially mediated, interacting with a knowledgeable or skillful partner, either an

155
 Thelma R. Mingoa, Therese M. Estacio, and Joanna M. Perlas

adult or a more competent peer (Bovey & Strain, 2003).

Peer Interaction during play includes behaviors like comforting and helping other children,
showing fairness (including sharing and taking turns), listening to comments and suggestions
of others, joining the play themes of other children, using language and physical behavior,
disagreeing without fighting, directing others’ actions politely, showing creativity in play,
encouraging others to join play, and showing positive emotion during play like smiling or
laughing; and for some children there is disruptive behavior and non-participation (Bovery &
Strain 2003; Fantuzzo & Hampton, 2000). This also involves exposure to opinions and
feedback from other children, and recognizing and respecting feelings and ideas of other
children (Australian Government Department of Education, 2009).
On the contrary, absence of positive social interactions in childhood is linked to negative
consequences later in life, such as withdrawal, loneliness, depression, and feelings of anxiety.
In addition, low acceptance by peers in the early years is a predictor of grade retention, school
dropout, and mental health and behavior problems (Ladd, 1999). Teachers therefore should
intentionally help promote children’s positive interactions with adults and peers, guiding and
planning play experiences in various settings (Evangelou et al., 2009).
There are different types of play. One classification scheme for play is as follows: (a)
locomotor/ active play (physical, outdoors, sports); (b) socio-dramatic (enactment with dolls,
role-playing, with scenes); (c) manipulative/exploratory (with construction materials, puzzles,
and patterns); (d) creative (creating, designing, etc.); among others (Hughes, 2002). Many
Filipino games are active games.
Another classification scheme for play is based on the fact that children of various ages
vary in social, cognitive, emotional and physical development, and is classified as follows: (a)
Solitary /Independent Play (6 months to 3+ years) where children play alone even when there
are other children around; (b) Onlooker behavior (18 months to 3+ years) when children just
watch others play; (c) Parallel/Adjacent Play (2 to 4+ years) when children play with similar
toys but only playing side by side, not playing with each other; (d) Associative Play (3 ½ to 5
years) when children play, practice language and social skills not necessarily working
together at the same game, just imitating other children around them, each possibly having a
monologue beside each other; and (e) Cooperative Play (4 ½ years and up) when children
have developed social skills and form friendships, talking, discussing, working on a project

156
 Introducing Filipino Games To Promote Peer Play Interaction

together, or doing dramatic play together, even playing elaborate games with rules, organized
sports and board games (Parten, 1932, cited in Shaffer, 2009; Ramseyer, 2007).
However, there are arguments regarding this classification in terms of sequence, duration
and age of onset of types of play. Some say (1) Solitary play is life-long, associated with
concentration, and is not confined to 6 months to 3 years of age only, nor is it a sign of
immaturity, and (2) whether children younger than 3 years are unable to play cooperative
games (Shaffer, 2009). Thus the introduction of Filipino games to 3 to 4 year old children
could actually still be developmentally appropriate.
Filipino games usually use cooperative play. These are played as part of Filipino pastime in
the neighborhood streets, for recreation and socialization, excitement, development of playing
skills and physical development (Malay, 1956, cited in Lopez, 2001). According to Henson
and Henson (2001), games bring children together and develop values like cooperation,
sportsmanship, confidence building and brotherhood. These games also strengthen the ties
between families, neighbors and friends (Malay, 1956, cited in Lopez, 2001; Buan, Monte,
Dela Cruz & Salangsang, 2011).

Related studies. Kitsmann and Howard (2011) investigated the emotion socialization of
early childhood educators in Hong Kong (PRC) and Memphis (USA). They then proposed a
conceptual model that integrates Le Vine’s work in cultural anthropology and research on
emotion socialization. Results show that adults in both countries have the same goal to help
children develop emotional competence (i.e., skills for emotion expression, knowledge, and
regulation). This is achieved universally through adult responses to emotions, modeling,
emotion conversations and meta-emotion philosophies; although implementation is culture-
specific.
The current study recognizes that emotions play a strong role on whether a child’s peer
relationships are successful or not. However, the current study focuses more on social
competence, specifically peer interaction among young children, while Kitsmann and Howard
(2011) focus more on emotional competence. Common to both studies is the critical role of
early childhood educators as agents in the transmission of cultural values and practices, and in
guiding young children towards social or emotional competence.
Similarly, Rhee (2007) investigated the role of teachers in furthering the development of

157
 Thelma R. Mingoa, Therese M. Estacio, and Joanna M. Perlas

social competence in young children. By finding the reasons for difficulties in interacting with
other children, examining changing play behavior, and observing teachers’ roles in helping
them become involved in peer group play, Rhee (2007) was able to find ways of helping two
non-sociable four-year-old children (one boy and one girl) to become involved in peer group
play. Observation was done one child at a time, over more than nine months. Data was meta-
analyzed, with reasons for non-participation compared to Colewell and Hart (2006); for stages
of play, analyzed in relation to Parten’s research (Parten,1932, cited in Shaffer, 2009); and
for the teacher’s roles, they were analyzed as to the strategies or roles they played, their action
and its effects on the child. Results show that lack of communication skills and emotional
instability were the main difficulties the children faced. For stages of play, these children
passed through five distinct stages of play, from staying alone, to showing interest in peer
group play, voluntarily joining friends, actively playing with one or two friends, to finally
becoming an active member of the peer play group. And for teacher roles, the teachers during
this time were making the children feel safe, giving them an opportunity to experience
familiar things, suggesting plays, creating opportunities for them to become acquainted with
other children, and modeling how to play with other children.
The current study is similar to Rhee’s study in that it tried to find ways of helping non-
sociable children join a peer group in play. But aside from observations in play patterns or
types or stages of play, specific peer play interactions or behaviors were focused on. Reasons
for difficulties in joining were not focused on here, neither was teacher roles during this time.
This study focused on the effect of a particular strategy, which was the introduction of
Filipino games and how it affected peer interaction by comparing pre and post intervention
results, using a checklist, anecdotal records, interviews and observations.

Synthesis

Peer interaction, especially through play, aids in the development of children. Through play
children get to learn social, physical, language, emotional, and cognitive skills. There are
different types of play, but nowadays, many Filipino children rarely play group games. The
present generation has been exposed to a variety of electronic games in handheld
technological devices that promote solitary play. To attain the benefits of cooperative play,

158
 Introducing Filipino Games To Promote Peer Play Interaction

this research attempted to introduce Filipino games and found out its effect on peer interaction.

Method

Design. This is a qualitative action research. The researchers used observation, video
recording, anecdotal records, interview and a Peer Play Checklist in data gathering, done over
6 weeks.

Sample. The sample consisted of eleven children aged three to four years old, enrolled in a
play-based private school in Metro Manila, five girls and six boys.

Intervention. The traditional Filipino games used in this study were pilot-tested for
simplicity and appropriateness for 3 to 4-year old children. These are (1) “Aso at Pusa”
(“Dog and Cat”), a tag game with the “it” player as the “dog” sitting in the center of a circle
on the ground, and would run after the “cats” who try to steal “bones” (slippers or other
objects); (2) “Luksong Tinik” (jumping over “thorns”) when two children sit on the ground
and use their legs and hands as obstacles (“thorns”) over which other players jump over, and
(3) “Tumbang Preso” (“knocking down the prisoner”), basically a tag game where the “it” is
standing near an empty can on the ground and runs after anyone who successfully knocks
down the can. The knockers usually use their slippers for knocking down the can, and try to
retrieve these before the “it” could tag them.

Instrument. A checklist for observing peer play interaction was used. In the context of
observing children’s play, the researchers used a behavioral checklist adapted from the Penn
Interactive Peer Play Scale (PIPPS). This is a behavioral rating scale used for understanding
peer play behaviors in early childhood (Fantuzzo, Tighe, McWayne, Davis, & Childs, 2002).
It consists of parallel versions of parent and teacher rating scales to assess play in the home
and neighborhood, and play in the classroom & school during free play, consecutively. Each
version consists of 32 items including dimensions on (1) Play Interaction (strengths -
comforting and helping other children, showing creativity in play, and encouraging others to

159
 Thelma R. Mingoa, Therese M. Estacio, and Joanna M. Perlas

join play) (2) Play Disruption (aggressive, antisocial behaviors that interfere with on-going
peer play interactions) and (3) Play Disconnection (withdrawn behavior and nonparticipation
in peer play). This checklist is not for diagnosis or testing. It was developed and validated
with a target population of children from a large urban school district with plenty of low-
income, minority children, and is not recommended for use in a different population (Castro,
Mendez, & Fantuzzo, 2002).
The checklist used in this study is an adaptation, containing only 10 interactive peer play
behaviors as follows: Helps other children; Shows fairness (shares, takes turns); Listens to the
comments/suggestions of others (including follows rules); Responds to ideas and thoughts
presented by others; Joins others’ play themes; Uses language instead of physical behavior to
play situations; Disagrees without fighting; Directs others' action politely; Encourages others
to join play; Shows positive emotion during play like smiles/laughs. The checklist was
content validated by review of two faculty experts for relevance and clarity.

Data Gathering. Pre- and post- intervention observations by two researchers and one lead
teacher was done using a checklist for the duration of one week each, during free play.
Observations in the form of anecdotal records helped in analyzing how effective the
intervention was. Conversations and peer interaction were noted and video-recorded.

Data Analysis. This research is qualitative. Detailed analysis of child behaviors from
anecdotal records and video recordings was done. Data analysis of the checklist results is
limited to descriptive statistics to show the difference in frequency of peer play interaction
behaviors between pre- and post-intervention observations.

Results

Pre-intervention observation show that some children in this class have the difficulty in
controlling strong emotions, expressing themselves, sharing, joining play and sustaining
positive interaction. It was observed that the many of the children in the classroom preferred
to play by themselves.

160
 Intrroducing Filipino G
Games To Promote
e Peer Play Interaction

Child AA.. loves to play

y in the dramaatic center and science centerr, is optimisticc, lively, likes
to play withh friends and engages in prretend play. She
S is very crreative when playing with
different maaterials. Child AA exchangees her ideas with
w friends an
nd initiates plaay. But when
her friends would
w share th
heir ideas, she does not pay attention. She knows how too politely say
“borrow”, but nd wouldn’t leet her, she geets very upset and cries. Shhe fights and
b if her frien
argues with classmates at times
t when shhe disagrees.
After inteervention (Figu
ure 1), Child AA is seen to
o have improv
ved in respond
nding to ideas
and thoughtss presented by
y others, using language in expressing
e emo
otions, and dirrecting others’’
actions polittely. She can now
n disagree w
without fightin
ng.

Fiigure 1. Child AA
A Frequency C
Comparison Chaart for Pre and Post
P – Interventiion

Child BB
B. who often comes
c to schoool late, findss his friends playing
p at diffferent centers
when he arriives, minding their own plaay. He is a frieend to everyon
ne and can enngage himself
with others’ play themes. He is fond off balloons, brin
ngs one to scho
ool every day to play with,
and sometim
mes share them
m, although hhe usually witthdraws and prefers
p to worrk or play in
isolation. Att times he inv
vites friends tto play with him
h but he is usually bossyy and during
misunderstanndings he figh
hts physically.
After the intervention, Child BB (Figure 2) learn
ned to use lan
nguage insteadd of physical
behavior to play
p situationss, to disagree w
without fightin
ng, and to be polite
p when dirrecting others’’
actions. Eveery time he en
nters the classs, he would share
s ideas an
nd stories withh classmates.
There are sttill times that he isolates hi
himself but he does it to co
oncentrate in hhis work. He
allows otherrs to join him but
b sets his ow
wn rules.

161
 Thelma R. Mingoa, Thherese M. Estacio,, and Joanna M. Perlas
P

F
Figure 2. Child BB
B Frequency C
Comparison Chaart for Pre and Post
P - Interventiion

Child CC
C. is very sociable, often pplaying at the blocks corneer with 2-3 off his friends,
building tow
wers, toy cars, or building raacetracks. Wh
hen other child
dren want to jooin his group
of friends, hee hesitates to allow
a them to jjoin. He usuallly has a happy
y disposition, often smiling
and laughingg. When he disagrees
d at soomething he never
n gets into
o a physical fi
fight but uses
language andd is very politte in saying noo. He also direects others as they
t play withh a polite tone
of voice. Hee is also able to listen and easily respon
nds to the ideaas presented to him by his
peers.
After inteervention (Fig
gure 3) Child CC has rem
mained sociablee as before, bbut this time
learned to innvite others to
o join play. H ws others who are not from his circle of
He even allow
friends to joiin in.

F
Figure 3. Child CC
C Frequency C
Comparison Chaart for Pre and Post
P - Interventiion

162
 Intrroducing Filipino G
Games To Promote
e Peer Play Interaction

Child DD ho she wants to play with and

D. chooses wh a excludes others
o who wa
want to join in
although shee does not get into physical fights. When in a bad mood
d, she would ffrown, firmly
say “no”, bee rude and wo
ould not follow
w directions given
g to her. When
W in a goood mood she
would smilee, listen and resspond to her ppeers.
After inteervention (Fig y to respond to ideas and
gure 4) Childd DD improveed her ability
thoughts preesented by oth
hers; and joineed others’ plaay themes morre often. Som
me new things
she learned includes being
g polite in dirrecting others’’ actions and encouraging
e oothers to join,
saying “pleaase” and “no” politely . Som
mething she stiill needs to leaarn is to show fairness, still
having difficculty playing with a not close friends.
w other classsmates who are

Fiigure 4. Child DD
D Frequency C
Comparison Chaart for Pre and Post
P – Interventiion

Child EE.
E. often plays with the blockks and tinker toys.
t He usually played alonne but usually
tolerated othhers to play with him. He listtens and respo
onds to ideas being
b presentedd to him.

F
Figure 5. Child EE
E Frequency C
Comparison Chaart for Pre and Post
P – Interventiion

163
 Thelma R. Mingoa, Thherese M. Estacio,, and Joanna M. Perlas
P

After the intervention (F

Figure 5), Chiild EE improv
ved in his abiliity to show faiirness, and in
joining otherrs’ play themees. Somethingg new he learn
ned was to pollitely direct otthers’ actions
and to encouurage others to
o join play. Hee now openly talks to his frriends and shaares his ideas.
He approachhes others and
d initiates convversations, and
d play saying “Can you play
ay with me?”.
y and selflesslly says sorry if he hurts a friend. He alsso hugs other
He helps in packing away
children to show
s affection
n.
F. is a very afffectionate and sweet girl. Sh
Child FF he likes to hug others, help thhem and play
with them. She
S likes to play
p pretend w
with her girl friends
f in the dramatic areaa. She openly
listens to othher children’ss stories and oopinions, initiaates and sustaains conversattions and can
equally resppond to ideas. She can easiily adapt to others’
o play th
hemes. But shhe sometimes
fights otherss when she dissagrees, and caan be demandiing and bossy by ordering oother children
around.
After the intervention (Figure 6) Chhild FF improved her skills in showingg fairness, in
disagreeing without fightting, and in eencouraging others
o to join play. Somethhing new she
learned was to direct otherr’s action poliitely. She sharres her drawing and coloringg materials to
ws pictures fo
friends, draw or friends andd gives it to them,
t politely asks if she ccan exchange
coloring maaterials with others, can nnow wait forr her turn. Sh
he also listenns to others’
suggestions in drawing an
nd coloring. W
Whenever she disagrees,
d she would say, “N
No, it’s okay.
I like this” or
o “Sorry, I lik
ke it this way””. When playin
ng with puzzles she would strictly abide
with the rules and play fairly
fa with frieends. She equ
ually distributees puzzles andd dominos to
friends to haave equal chan
nces in playingg. She has a veery sharp mem
mory and know
ws whose turn
it is. She now
w encourages others to play with her and is
i no longer bo
ossy.

F
Figure 6. Child FF
F Frequency C
Comparison Chaart for Pre and Post
P - Interventioon

164
 Intrroducing Filipino G
Games To Promote
e Peer Play Interaction

Child GG
G often says “Can I join youu?” and alway
ys smiling as she
s joins in. SShe is fond of
joining in with
w the play th
hemes of her ppeers and exprressing her inttention to joinn. She follows
directions giiven to her by her peers but she has a diffficulty giving out directions politely. She
tends to playy with only a few
f friends andd excludes oth
hers from joiniing in.
After the implementation (figure 77), Child GG improved in the followinng behaviors:
showing fairrness, respond
ding to ideas aand thoughts presented
p by others,
o disagreeeing without
fighting, andd directing oth
hers’ actions ppolitely. She does
d not need to
t be remindeed to let other
children joinn in her play. She
S now uses the word “pleease” when sh
he wants somet
ething and the
word “no” politely
p when she
s disagrees w
with something.

F
Figure 7. Child GG
G Frequency C
Comparison Chaart for Pre and Post
P - Interventiion

Child HH
H. is often sm
miling while playing with peers. He intteracts with aanyone, helps
others and encourages
e otthers to play with him. Hee is often seen
n playing witth the blocks
building tow
wers or playin
ng with the toyys cars and gears. He offerrs help, is ablle to listen to
other childreen’s thoughts, but when he ddisagrees, that eventually ressults to fightinng.

F
Figure 8. Child HH
H Frequency C
Comparison Chaart for Pre and Post
P - Interventiion

165
 Thelma R. Mingoa, Thherese M. Estacio,, and Joanna M. Perlas
P

After inteervention (Fig

gure 8), Childd HH improved in these tw
wo behaviors : disagreeing
without fighhting and direecting others’ actions politeely. Somethin
ng new he leaarned was to
respond to iddeas and thoug
ght presented bby others, learrning to say “n
no”, “it is okayy” and “thank
you”.

Child II. loves to play in the blocks area. Every daay, during cen
nter time, he w
would proceed
to the blocks area, usually
y constructingg a rocket ship
p. He usually plays
p with thee teacher aide
and seldom plays with claassmates. He ddoes not know
w how to wait for his turn, aand whines if
he does not get
g what he wants.
w He has th
the tendency to
o grab other ch
hildren’s toys,, and is prone
to disrupting other child
dren’s play. IIf Child II was
w asked “Can I borrow??” he would
completely ignore
i that ch
hild. Child II lloves to play pretend and would
w sometim
mes initiate a
conversationn. But he is fo
ond of using phhysical action
ns instead of taalking when pplaying and is
very possesssive of the toyss he uses.
gure 9), Childd II more ofteen now joins others’ play themes, and
After inteervention (Fig
politely direccting others’ actions.
a He now
w exchanges his
h ideas with others and dooes not isolate
himself from
m the group. He
H no longer pplays with hiss usual “rockeet ships” in thee blocks area
but instead he
h plays with other toys wiith friends. Du
uring play, he listens to wha
hat his friends
say. He no longer
l ignores them. Howevver, he still criies when he does not get wh
what he wants,
and he still gets into figh
hts when he ddisagrees with other children
n and this is aactually seen
more often. Something neew he learnedd after the intervention is to
o help others and to show
fairness. Whhen he wants something,
s he rarely grabs to
oys, but often asks for perm
mission. When
he slips backk to grabbing or
o disrupting oothers’ play, hee often apolog
gizes.

F
Figure 9. Child II Frequency Coomparison Charrt for Pre and Po
ost – Interventioon

166
 Intrroducing Filipino G
Games To Promote
e Peer Play Interaction

Child JJ.
J. loves to play in the dramatic cen
nter, and lovees solving puuzzles at the
manipulativees center. Altthough she dooes not invitee others to join her play, sshe does not
exclude otheers who woulld like to joinn. She enjoys conversing with,
w workingg and helping
ddresses them. She does not choose just a
others. Whenn talking, she faces them annd correctly ad
few friends to
t the exclusio
on of others. H
However, when
n she disagreees with others,, she gets into
physical fighhts.
After the intervention (Figure 10), Chhild JJ more often
o now can
n disagree withhout fighting,
can talk to and
a direct otheers’ actions poolitely, and to encourage
e oth
hers to join herr in play. She
would oftenn call and enco
ourage friendss to join her in
n building tall houses with bblocks, share
her stories too others whilee playing withh the blocks, and
a is open to suggestions oon what to do
next. She noow has learned to say “Sorrry”, “Please” and “Thank you”.
y Whenevver the tower
they built coollapses, she do
oes not get maad but instead she laughs an
nd says, “It is ookay. We can
build it againn and again an
nd again”.

F
Figure 10. Child
d JJ Frequency C
Comparison Chaart for Pre and Post
P - Interventioon

Child KK
K. is often seen playing aloone. He disag
grees with his peers often ffor just about
anything. When
W he doess not get whhat he wants he would wh
hine and throow tantrums.
Sometimes he
h pushes otheer children whho want to joiin him. He alsso gets into phhysical fights.
He does not listen or respo
ond to what oth
thers say.
After inteervention (Figu
ure 11), Childd KK more offten now joinss others’ playy themes, and
uses polite language in expressing em
motions. New
w things he leearned were: (1) showing
fairness, (2)) listening to comments orr suggestions of others, (3)) politely direecting others’
actions, andd (4) encourag
ging other to jjoin in play. Two things he
h still has too learn are to
respond to iddeas and thoug
ghts presentedd by others, an
nd to be able to
o disagree withhout fighting.

167
 Thelma R. Mingoa, Thherese M. Estacio,, and Joanna M. Perlas
P

This time hee actually inittiates play witth other childrren, calling ou
ut for examplle “Child FF,
look at this!”” When he do
oes not get whhat he wants hee still has the tendency to w
whine, but not
as often as before.
b He alsso does not puush others aw
way anymore. When
W someonne plays near
him, he wouuld just contin
nue to play. Hee now listens to his peers who
w talk to him
m but he still
needs guidannce when it co
omes to acceptting ideas pressented to him.

Figgure 11. Child KK

K Frequency C
Comparison Ch
hart for Pre and Post
P – Interventtion

As a whoole (Table 1), there

t were peeer interaction behavioral sk
kills already prresent among
the children before interveention. Most oof the children were already helpful (10/111); listened to
comments or
o suggestionss of others (110/11), and would
w show em
motions of haappiness like
smiling or laaughing during play (10/11)). Helping oth
her children was
w a new skilll that child II
learned afterr the interventiion.
Showing fairness is no
ot very commoon from the start
s (5/11). After the intervvention, three
more childreen showed faiirness more ooften, two learrned this as a new skill, annd this is still
absent in onee child (DD).
Respondinng to the tho
oughts and iddeas presenteed by others (including taaking others’
perspective) is not very co
ommon (6/11)) from the startt. After interveention, three m
more children
learned to doo this more offten, for one chhild (HH) thiss is an entirely
y new skill, annd for another
(KK), this iss still absent.
Disagreeinng without fighting
f is soomething nott common at
a the start ((3/11). After
intervention,, seven more children
c learneed to do this more
m often, butt this still remaains absent in
one child (K
KK).

168
 Introducing Filipino Games To Promote Peer Play Interaction

Table 1. Summary of results for all children in the study

Peer Play Interaction

A B C D E F G H I J
Child
already already already already already already
AA present present present
IMPROVED
present
IMPROVED IMPROVED IMPROVED
present present

already already already already already already already already

BB present present present present present
IMPROVED IMPROVED
present present present

already already already already already already already already already

CC present present present present present present present present
IMPROVED
present

already already already already already

DD present Absent present
IMPROVED IMPROVED
present present NEW NEW present

already already already already already already

EE present
IMPROVED
present present
IMPROVED
present present NEW NEW present

already already already already already already already

FF present
IMPROVED
present present present present
IMPROVED NEW present present

already already already already already already

GG present
IMPROVED
present
IMPROVED
present present
IMPROVED IMPROVED
present present

already already already already already already already

HH present present present NEW present present
IMPROVED IMPROVED
present present

already already already already

II NEW NEW present present
IMPROVED
present
IMPROVED IMPROVED IMPROVED
present

already already already already already already already

JJ present present present present present present
IMPROVED IMPROVED IMPROVED
present

already
KK present NEW NEW Absent IMPROVED IMPROVED Absent NEW NEW IMPROVED

Code:
already present – always seen since pre-intervention phase
NEW – not seen during pre-intervention and seen only in post-intervention
IMPROVED – sometimes observed in pre-intervention and more often observed in post-intervention
Absent – not observed in pre-intervention nor in post-intervention

Peer Play Interaction (behaviors):

A. Helps other children
B. Shows fairness and not bias
C. Listens to the comments/suggestions of others
D. Responds to ideas and thoughts presented by others
E. Joins others’ play themes
F. Uses language instead of physical behavior to play situations
G. Disagrees without fighting
H. Directs others' action politely
I. Encourages others to join play
J. Shows positive emotion during play (e.g., smiles, laughs)

Directing others' action politely is also not common among the children (2/11). After intervention,
four more children learned to do this more often, and four more children learned this as a new skill.
Another uncommon peer interaction behavior at the start is encouraging others to join in their play
(5/11). After intervention, three more children did this more often, and this is an entirely new skill
among three other children.
Among all the children in this study, child KK improved in 3 out of 11 behaviors observed,
learned 4 new ones (fairness, listening, being polite and encouraging others to join), but still
needs to learn 2 more (responding to others ideas, disagreeing without fighting).

169
 Thelma R. Mingoa, Therese M. Estacio, and Joanna M. Perlas

DISCUSSION

It is interesting to note that even without adult direction or intervention, most of these
children would help each other and listen to each other. Possibly because adults model this
behavior and children naturally imitate this. This might also imply that if a child does help
others or does not listen to other children, adults might want to look into why these children
who do not exhibit these and could help the child acquire this behavior. Consequently, in
accordance to numerous educational theories like that of Vygotsky (Daniels, 2001) or
Bronfenbrenner (Harkonen, 2007), if a child is exposed to negative behaviors, he might
exhibit these behaviors as well.
Behaviors like showing fairness, disagreeing without fighting, responding to thoughts and
ideas presented by others, are not common among these children and could be due to their
young age, so that immaturity resulted in poor peer interaction, as found in the study of Rhee
(2007).
Getting angry is normal at any age, but how anger is expressed or how to get out of anger
could be affected by how adults around the child deal with anger. These children are still
learning impulse control, not yet realizing the consequences of emotional outbursts. As with
learning theories of Vygotsky (Daniels, 2001) or Bronfenbrenner (Harkonen, 2007), adults
modeling behavior, media, or other factors may affect how children deal with anger
themselves. This is the same even for talking politely to others.
For children, learning to encourage other children to join in play apparently is facilitated by
introducing fun group games to children, as in the case of many Filipino games.

Conclusion

Peer play interaction could be affected by age of children, or by what the children see
around them, including modeling behaviors of adults. For children who are used to playing
alone, playing with others might be quite difficult, especially with exposure to highly
technological toys that promote solitary play. Difficulty playing with others may also be
because the children do not know any fun group games.

170
 Introducing Filipino Games To Promote Peer Play Interaction

Filipino games can help improve peer play interaction among 3- to 4-year old children,
even among children who isolate themselves in class. Teachers can intentionally introduce
these to children of this age group (Shaffer, 2009) so as to reap the language, social,
emotional, cognitive and physical benefits, of playing cooperative games (Evangelou et al.,
2009).
Equipped with such knowledge, it is then possible for children to interact more with each
other even during free play. Consequently, playing Filipino games would also lead to the
preservation of the Filipino culture. Future research can use a larger sample and another age
group and for a longer period like perhaps one year.

References

Bovey, T., & P. Strain (2003). Promoting positive peer social interactions. Center on the
Social and Emotional Foundations for Early Learning. www.vanderbilt.edu/csefel .
Bredekamp, S and Copple, C. (Eds). (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early
childhood programs. Washington DC: NAEYC.
Buan, A., Monte, R., Dela Cruz, J., & Salangsang, M. (2011). Preservation of culture
heritage through Philippine games. Asia Life Sciences, 20(2).
Castro, M., Mendez, J. L., and Fantuzzo, J. (2002). A validation study of the Penn
Interactive Peer Play Scale with urban Hispanic and African preschool children.
School Psychology Quarterly, 12(2), 109-127.
Colwell, M., & Hart, S. (2006). Emotion framing: Does it relate to children's emotion
knowledge and social behavior? Early Child Development and Care, 176, 591-603.
Coolahan, KC., Fantuzzo, J., Mendez, J., and McDermott, P. (2000). Preschool peer
interactions and readiness to learn: relationships between classroom peer and learning
behaviors and conduct. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 458-465.
Daniels, H. ( 2001 ). Vygotsky and Pedagogy. London: Routledge Falmer.
Densmore, A, & Bauman, M. (2011). Your Successful Preschooler: Ten Skills Children
Need to Become Confident and Socially Engaged. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Imprint.
Dinkmayer, D., McKay, G., & Dinkmayer, D. (1978). Parent Education Leader’s Manual
Retrieved from http://childdevelopmentinfo.com/childdevelopment/birth_order.shtml

171
 Thelma R. Mingoa, Therese M. Estacio, and Joanna M. Perlas

Evangelou, M, Sylva, K., Kyriacou, M. Wild, M. and Glenny, G. (2009). Early years
learning and development: literature review. Oxford: University of Oxford.
Fantuzzo, J. W., and Hampton, V. R. (2000). Penn Interactive Peer Play Scale: A parent
and teacher rating system for young children. In K. Gitlin-Weiner, A. Sandgrund & C.
Schaefer (Eds.), Play diagnosis and assessment (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
Fantuzzo, J. W., Tighe, E., McWayne, C. M., Davis, G., & Childs, S. (2002). Parent
involvement in early childhood education and children's peer play competencies: An
examination of multivariate relationships. NHSA Dialog: A Research-To-Practice
Journal for the Early Intervention Field, 6, 3–21.
Gauvain M. and Cole M. (Eds) (1997). Readings on the Development of Children. NY:
W.H. Freeman & Company.
Gorin, S. and Steffens, C. (1997). Learning to Play, Playing to Learn. LA: Lowell House
Publishing Inc.
Guralnick, M. J. (1990). Social competence and early intervention. Journal of Early
Intervention. 14, 3-14.
Hampton, V.R. (1999). The Penn Interactive Peer Play Scale for kindergarten: Building
essential linkages in early childhood assessment. Dissertations available from
ProQuest. Paper AAI9953540. Retrieved 2014 from http://repository.upenn.edu/
dissertations/AAI9953540.
Harkonen, U. (2007). The Bronfenbrenner ecological systems theory of human
development. Scientific Articles of V International Conference PERSON.COLOR.
NATURE.MUSIC. Latvia: Daugavpils University.
Henson, M., and Henson, D. (2001). Games Filipino children used to play. Philippines:
Giraffe Books.
Howes, C. (1988). Peer interaction of young children. Monographs of the Society for
Research in Child Development 53 (1, Serial No. 217).
Hughes, B. (2002) A Playworker’s Taxonomy of Play Types, 2nd edition, London: PlayLink.
Isenberg, J.P. and Jalongo, M.R., (2010). Why is Play Important? Social and Emotional
Development, Physical Development, Creative Development. USA: Pearson Allyn
Bacon Prentice Hall.
Jamison, K. R. (2010). Playing is learning. Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario
Booklet, Retrieved April 2014 from http://www.etfo.ca/ELKP/PlayingisLearning/

172
 Introducing Filipino Games To Promote Peer Play Interaction

Documents/PlayingisLearning
Kitsmann, K. M., and Howard, K. M. (2011). Emotion socialization by early childhood
educators: conceptual models from psychology. Asia Pacific Journal of Research in
Early Childhood Education, 5 (1), 23-44.
Kostelnik, M. (1998). Guiding children's social development. (3rd ed.). Albany, New York:
Delmar Publishers.
Ladd, G.W. (1999). Peer relationships and social competence during early and middle
childhood. Annual Review of Psychology, 50: 333–59.
Lieberman, A. F. (1977). Preschoolers' competence with a peer: Relations with attachment
and peer experience. Child Development, 48, 1277-1287.
Lopez, M. L. (2001). A study of Philippine games. Philippines: University of the
Philippines Press.
Mitchell, H. & Wild, M. (2007). Early Childhood Studies. Great Britain: Learning Matters
Ltd.
Nadon-Gabrion, C. (2007). Language, a bridge to learning in movement and music. Theory
in Practice, 13, 4.
Rogers, V. (2011). Games and activities for exploring feelings with children : giving
children the confidence to navigate emotions and friendships. London, UK: Jessica
Kingsley Publishers.
Rhee, WY (2007). The Role of Teachers In Furthering The Development of Social
Competence in Young Children. Asia Pacific Journal of Research in Early Childhood
Education, 1 (1), 39-64.
Ramseyer, V. (2008). Stages of Play. Kids and Teens. Retrieved April 2014 from
http://ezinearticles.com/?Stages-of-Play&id=900253
Reynolds, G. & Jones, E. (1997). Master players: Learning from children at play. NY:
Teachers College Press.
Santrock, J. (2005). Children. (9th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
Shaffer, D. (2009). Social and personality development. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage
Learning.
Woods. (2008). Young Children’s Choices and Decisions in Free Play – Free Choice Time.
Retrieved October, 2012 from http://www.tactyc.org.uk/pdfs/2008conf_Wood.pdf

173